9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) was not justified in interfering with order, order passed by the adjudicating authority confirmed - E/462 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 9-3-2011 - Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. Appellant : Rep. by Shri R. K. Verma, DR Respondent : Rep. by Shri S. Yadav, Advocate Per: Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar: Heard the DR for the appellant and learned Advocate for the respondents. 2. This appeal arises from order dated 09.11.2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Indore. By the impugned order, the order passed by the adjudicating authority has been set-aside. Deputy Commissioner, Pithampur, Dhar under his order dated 16.08.2005 had confirmed the demand of Rs. 71,721/- alongwith interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndents by issuing debit notes and there is nothing on record placed by the respondents to reveal that the cost of such die and development charges formed part of the assessable value of the final product. 5. Indeed, plain reading of the impugned order discloses that the Commissioner (Appeals) merely on presumption that the cost of development of tools and dies is required to be amortised in such a manner that total amount so incurred is to be equally distributed amongst the total number of items manufactured and while clearing the final goods the same would stand already included in the assessable value and thus would be recovered by way of amortization without charging it separately under invoices or raising debit notes to the customer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants was supplied by them. Whatever cost has been incurred by them in developing the prototype will form part of the assessable value. If any expenses have been incurred on R D they have to form part of the intrinsic value of the prototype developed and supplied by them. The Hon'ble Supreme court in the case, relied upon by the learned SDR, has observed that intellectual inputs greatly enhance the value and giving example, the Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned that the value of paper is negligible as compared to the value or price of the Encyclopaedia or a Dictionary. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that this means that the charges of a duty is on the final product whether it be Encyclopaedia or the engineering or architectural drawings or any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be sustainable. Apparently, the decision was in different set of facts. The contention which was sought to be canvassed in Ashok Iron works were never the points of defence in the case in hand and, therefore, the said decision will not be of any help to the respondents to defend the impugned order. 10. As already pointed out above the clear finding to the effect that the respondents have been charging in relation to die research development charges from their customers by raising debit notes without disclosing the said fact to the department and without including the cost thereof in the assessable value of the final product apparently justified the order passed by the adjudicating authority and, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
